Plastic Surgery Department, Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Holtye Road, East Grinstead, West Sussex RH19 3DZ, UK.
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010 Jan;63(1):65-72. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2008.08.062. Epub 2008 Dec 18.
Rubin observed that there was a great deal of variation in smiles. [Rubin LR. The anatomy of a smile: its importance in the treatment of facial paralysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 1974;53:384-7] Smile reconstruction requires an understanding of the facial movements that occur during a normal smile. Facial reanimation should be tailored for each individual patient so that the movements on the reconstructed side are similar to that on the normal side.
The aim of this study is to produce a quantitative analysis of smiles, as a basis for smile reconstruction and to compare our subject's smiles to the classification suggested by Rubin.
The smiles of 71 volunteers were analysed using three-dimensional (3D) stereophotogrammetry in x, y and z vectors. Each subject had the distances and angles of 10 surface landmarks (cheilion left and right (L&R), labiale superius/inferius, mid-lateral upper/lower lip (L&R), nasolabial fold (L&R)) moved from the relaxed position to that in a maximum smile. All subjects' smiles were classified into the Rubin subtypes of corner of the mouth, canine and full-denture smile.
The average distances and angles moved by oral landmarks during a smile in a 3D plane were--cheilion: 16.6mm at 31 degrees ; labiale superius: 8.2mm at 31 degrees; upper mid-lateral lip: 10.5mm at 25 degrees; labiale inferius: 5.3mm at -56 degrees; lower mid-lateral lip: 7.8mm at 41 degrees and nasolabial fold: 12.6mm at 33 degrees . Our population results for the smile subtypes suggested by Rubin were--corner-of-the-mouth smile: 77%, canine smile: 15% and full-denture smile: 8%.
Our study offers a simple quantitative method for measuring the smile to assess the outcome of reanimation surgery between different surgical procedures and units. Proportions of our study group with corner-of-the-mouth, canine and full-denture smiles were consistent with Rubin's study.
鲁宾观察到,笑容存在着很大的差异。[鲁宾 LR。笑容的解剖学:在面瘫治疗中的重要性。整形重建外科 1974;53:384-7]笑容重建需要了解正常笑容中发生的面部运动。面部再运动应该为每个患者量身定制,以便重建侧的运动与正常侧相似。
本研究的目的是对笑容进行定量分析,作为笑容重建的基础,并将我们的研究对象的笑容与鲁宾提出的分类进行比较。
使用三维(3D)立体摄影术分析 71 名志愿者的笑容,在 x、y 和 z 向量中。每位受试者的 10 个表面标志(口角左侧和右侧(L&R)、唇上/下唇(L&R)、中侧上/下唇(L&R)、鼻唇沟(L&R))从放松位置移动到最大笑容位置的距离和角度。所有受试者的笑容均分为鲁宾的口角、犬齿和全口义齿笑容亚型。
在 3D 平面上,口腔标志在微笑中移动的平均距离和角度为-口角:16.6mm,31 度;唇上:8.2mm,31 度;上唇中侧:10.5mm,25 度;唇下:5.3mm,-56 度;下唇中侧:7.8mm,41 度和鼻唇沟:12.6mm,33 度。我们对鲁宾提出的笑容亚型的人群结果为-口角笑:77%,犬齿笑:15%和全口义齿笑:8%。
我们的研究提供了一种简单的定量方法来测量笑容,以评估不同手术程序和单位之间的再运动手术的结果。我们研究组的口角、犬齿和全口义齿笑容比例与鲁宾的研究一致。